Actually, I haven't seen the comics, so you may be perfectly right. I'm just stating that those that I have watched the movie with, had no trouble understanding Nero or his motivations. There could be multiple reasons for this, but there it is.

Btw - I don't think I understand what you mean by open ended back story? I just meant it was open for interpretation and for people to make their own ideas about it.

However it wasn't open for interpretation. It was laid out in a comic book that you had to buy separate from your movie ticket. The open for interpretation excuse is often used to explain weak storytelling though.

But I have to reiterate: I loved the movie. I just felt they could have done better.

« Last Edit: February 28, 2012, 07:26:22 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

The how and why isn't necessary if you give the viewer enough information to form his own ideas of the situation.

Except that there wasn't. It was simply, Angry Bad Guy Nero wants revenge, oh and btw, he lost his wife, so he's going to destroy Vulcan! Why? Oh, you'll just have to read the comic book! That's hardly enough information to even make a person care and to fill in the blanks by speculating. At that point the movie can only add depth by showing what should have been in there in the first place. Doesn't really make sense to remove it as it's not doing your movie any favours.

To make matters worse, the comic book is like a middle finger to the audience, ie "Read the comic book for the full story, except it doesn't count, losers!" I had heard that J.J wanted the Nero parts to be canon while the TNG parts weren't or something to that effect, but we all know how that goes. It's not a very good idea to leave stuff out and then tell people to read a comic book that isn't even canon. That just sucks. Backstory like this is essential in general, for any movie. It's just not fair to those watching. For a movie like Star Trek, where they were trying to appeal to non-fans, I'd say it's even more crucial, because it's those people who aren't going to be the ones buying the comic book to get the extra part of the story that should have been in the movie, so they're effectively shooting themselves in the foot in regards to that. Yes, it's fine to have people make up their own ideas about the situation, but at the same time, it's only fair to build it up enough so that anyone can follow it no matter what in terms of the who's who and what's what in a universe as convoluted as Star Trek, because otherwise you lose those new fans you're trying to create and keep, to make it interesting enough for the new fans to want to stay by intriguing them. Don't and you're basically left with shock and awe which won't last very long.

I haven't read the comic, but I didn't think the Nero motivation was hard to follow in the movie. Spock tries to save Nero's planet. Spock fails. Nero blames Spock for destroyed planet, decides to take an eye for an eye and destroy Spock's planet. Fin.

Might as well say that Return of the Jedi is impossible to understand without having read Shadows of the Empire, otherwise how would the audience know how Leia got her bounty hunter armor from Boushh and Snoova?

wait... I thought Nero was PO'd at Spock for eating the last of the Golden Grahams. I mean, c'mon Spock, you don't fuck with another guys Golden Grahams. might as well piss in his apple juice if you do that.

oh, wait, he did......

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

Might as well say that Return of the Jedi is impossible to understand without having read Shadows of the Empire, otherwise how would the audience know how Leia got her bounty hunter armor from Boushh and Snoova?

Not really quite the same thing, because the story itself is contained within the movie itself. It does reasonably well at telling the story it needs to tell, minus some extra detail that one can read in novels should someone choose to do so. Compare that to Star Trek where it left a chunk of the backstory out including some major hows and whys that could have and should have been in the movie in the first place. Not saying the story is impossible to follow without it, but it feels incredibly thin and hollow without it in the context of a universe that tends to be rather philosophical. The backstory as told in the movie almost feels like some throwaway lines. For all we know, Spock gave him an atomic wedgie that he's just really pissed about.

It's not that we can't understand him. It's that there wasn't enough backstory to create something satisfying. The movie just relies on shock and awe, through and through to make up for it which doesn't hold up very well over multiple viewings.

While I wasn't bothered by Nero's lack of backstory (just Bana - and I suspect that performance/pacing had more to do with the lack of more Nero footage than wanting you to read a comic), I have to say it bugged the hell out of me the first time I saw ROTJ and Vader said, "Oh, I see you've constructed another lightsaber."

I wanted that scene. I loved Shadows for giving me that scene (and so much more). I was further absolutely floored to learn that they had actually filmed that scene and that it still existed!

Did the thin back story for Nero ruin the film or make it unwatchable? No. Did it lessen the emotional impact of his character? Quite a bit in my opinion. I'm always more appreciative of villains in a movie when I can find some empathy with that character's motivation. 2 dimensional Snidely Whiplash villains are a dime a dozen. While Nero wasn't that flimsy, he certainly wasn't a fully fleshed out character. If they'd simply included the scenes from the comic book in which we see that he was actually a good man and someone Spock actually respected, it would have made his hunt for revenge resonate that much more with audiences. This would have taken a very good film into the realm of great film, imho.

« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 04:21:29 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Could they have expanded on Nero in the film without losing the largely fast-paced "never a dull moment" feel of the movie? The runtime as-is is already over 2 hours.

Maybe they could have found a way to make Nero more complex, but I kind of feel like the spotlight was on (and should have been on) the crew of the Enterprise coming together. As an origins movie trying to establish the bonds and camaraderie between our heroes we're all familiar with after 79 episodes and 6 movies, that's a lot of ground to cover. Making Nero a flat Snidely Whiplash lets you say "villain to drive plot? check." and get back to developing the characters & universe.

But I don't disagree that Nero was a flat character; I just disagree about his motivations being hard to understand. Hopefully we'll get a deeper Khan-like villain for the sequel.

Could they have expanded on Nero in the film without losing the largely fast-paced "never a dull moment" feel of the movie? The runtime as-is is already over 2 hours.

Have you read the comics? Nero's back story could have been made quite succinct and full of action without adding more than 10 minutes or so. And as far as movie lengths, I don't believe that's an issue any more. Audiences today sit through 2 1/2 hour or more Michael Bay extravaganzas on a regular basis without batting an eye.

p.s. now I have the urge to watch this on blu ray tonight...

« Last Edit: February 29, 2012, 04:46:28 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Just the X11s,Roman and Purge in the headset thread made me realise i could connect them to my TV(rather than just my component cables from the 360),so started watching a lot of films now,as loud as i wish ...the LOTR music was friggin' great!!

Out of curiosity, Rumpy, which of the old Star Trek movies are your favorites? I have a theory.

I like all the old Star Treks. It's hard to have a favourite, but if you must certainly have one, then it's The Voyage Home. In general, I feel they all had more story and exposition to them. They were all more character-centric and never left the story to a footnote.

Oh and exactly, Hep. Nero was 1 dimensional at best. Not unwatcheable, no, but the backstory certainly would have helped. I read the comic book and then understood his sorrow and made me respect him a bit more, because you could feel his pain and why it was him out of all his people. It showed a side of grey, that he was perfectly reasonable until what happened with Romulus. He actually sounded like the kind of person that could work through it to come to a solution until he became insane with rage. That's the kind of angle I'm talking about. My original estimate of 10 minutes is probably a bit much like Hep mentions, but a 5 minute intro and setting of the scene would have done wonders. Show him on Romulus trying to work with the council over something that greatly concerns them, then cut to a scene where Nero talks to a silhouette who we later figure out to be Spock. Have Nero tell his wife that they'll get through this, that he'll be home soon, then cut to a shot of Romulus being destroyed. He's off-planet as he learns of what happens to his wife and is grief stricken, both for his wife, his upcoming child and his people. This is pretty much as I remember the comic book going. The rest can continue the way it is with next going to the shot of the Kelvin.

Out of curiosity, Rumpy, which of the old Star Trek movies are your favorites? I have a theory.

I like all the old Star Treks. It's hard to have a favourite, but if you must certainly have one, then it's The Voyage Home. In general, I feel they all had more story and exposition to them. They were all more character-centric and never left the story to a footnote.

Well there goes my theory. I was thinking you might be the type of Star Trek fan to prefer the cerebral movies and disdain the "fun" ones like Voyage Home.

Out of curiosity, Rumpy, which of the old Star Trek movies are your favorites? I have a theory.

I like all the old Star Treks. It's hard to have a favourite, but if you must certainly have one, then it's The Voyage Home. In general, I feel they all had more story and exposition to them. They were all more character-centric and never left the story to a footnote.

Well there goes my theory. I was thinking you might be the type of Star Trek fan to prefer the cerebral movies and disdain the "fun" ones like Voyage Home.

Hah, here I was thinking you'd be pegging me as the fan who likes The Motion Picture. Well, actually I do like it and I certainly don't find it to be as bad as most fans do. I do like the wide scope they were giving it, but it was a different time and it was more cerebral and I really don't think people would be able to sit for hours watching that these days It's one of those movies I appreciate for the time it was made in, and I certainly understand they were trying to mimic 2001 in its style. So, I certainly don't expect a slow and plodding movie like that today, but a little depth never hurt.

And oh yeah, one of the things I felt they did really well was with the soundtrack. I think it had the best Trek soundtrack in a long time.

I also have this feeling that I'm alone in liking Chekov in the movie. For some reason, everyone I know just hated him. I thought the actor, although looking a little younger than the rest (which isn't quite true as he's older than he looks), did an admirable job.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

I also have this feeling that I'm alone in liking Chekov in the movie. For some reason, everyone I know just hated him. I thought the actor, although looking a little younger than the rest (which isn't quite true as he's older than he looks), did an admirable job.

I liked Chekov, and didn't mind the younger look. he was written as the youngest of the crew in the original series, so it made sense.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

Yeah, he was pretty fun. Actually, I find the entire move a good experience, fun and entertaining while not targetting the lowest common denominator. I like that! Visually it was a blast as well, and the actors, Uhura aside I'm afraid, all made a good impression on me. Spock and Kirk of course were pretty damn cool, and their interactions were always interesting to watch - especially the emotional fight scene was interesting.

If I had to make a complaint, then perhaps there was a tiny weeny tiny bit too much light on that starship bridge...In the cinema it was like looking into the sun the first time :-D

Add me to the growing list of people who had no problems at all understanding Nero's motivations. The Star Trek movie never confused me for a second. For the record, I never cared much about Star Trek before this reboot and have never seen more than one episode of the show. All I had was a vague understanding who Spock was.

In short: Anyone who claims that Nero is impossible/hard to understand in this movie automatically loses the argument in my eyes, since my own experiences disqualifies him.

No one is saying that Nero's motivations weren't explained in the film, but that the explanation was perfunctory and that the back story occurred largely off screen. It's like condensing Luke Skywalker's intro in Star Wars into a 30 second explanation about what happened on Tatooine after he boards the Millennium Falcon. Yes, it would serve to explain the character...but only marginally, while leaving the emotional impact of the character on the cutting room floor.

And of course everyone who doesn't believe the way you do loses in your eyes. That you consider this a contest and not a discussion is why I tend not to get too bothered by your usual sweeping proclamations of victory.

p.s. growing? what's next? groundswell?

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 03:28:34 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

No one is saying that Nero's motivations weren't explained in the film, but that the explanation was perfunctory and that the back story occurred largely off screen. It's like condensing Luke Skywalker's intro in Star Wars into a 30 second explanation about what happened on Tatooine after he boards the Millennium Falcon. Yes, it would serve to explain the character...but only marginally, while leaving the emotional impact of the character on the cutting room floor.

Except the movie isn't really about Nero, it's about the original crew overcoming adversity to grow into the crew we all know and love. Nero is just a vehicle for that to happen and doesn't require a deep backstory to accomplish it. The comic exists for the type of people who want to dig deeper into the character (much like spinoff books and comics for many other movies out there).

As for the "you could explain it all in 10 minutes of footage" argument, unless you have an intimate understanding of the editing process, I don't think you can really say that with any authority. Instead of the quick flashback montage that takes about a minute we have now (told from Spock's perspective so it also serves to explain his character and the pain/guilt he feels), you have to leave the story for 10 minutes to go back in time and explain a bunch of stuff that isn't really vital to the story, as well as figure out a way to relate the scene to the audience in a way that makes sense as it would need to be told from Nero's point of view.

I had no problem understanding Nero, but onscreen he was portrayed as a one dimensional raving maniac and I believe the movie suffered for it. I realize the focus wasn't on him, but he was nothing more than a throwaway foozle who just needed to be killed because he was a homicidal maniac. A good, complex movie villain makes a movie stronger and Nero was as one dimensional as they come. As such, the Nero scenes are undoubtedly the weakest scenes in the movie and I believe that something could have been done to make him a more interesting, believable and maybe somewhat sympathetic character.

Rewatched the movie last night, and there's not only less Nero time than I remember, but I now more strongl feel that the movie is improved by him being a one dimensional and disposable character. His character development is as important as that of the asteroid in Armageddon. He is developed just enough to give the crew a clear objective to come together for, and to help explain the alternate universe concept. No more.

Maybe there'd be a way to make him more complex without taking away from the rest of the movie, but I think it'd be far too easy to run into Spider-Man 3 "too many origins stories" problems.

There's one villain and one villain only in the movie. I hardly believe it would suffer from too many origin stories since that number would always be...well...one.

I still believe in my earlier assertions. although I'll watch it again soon, I've already seen it twice and had the same impression so I doubt that will change.

Quote

Except the movie isn't really about Nero, it's about the original crew overcoming adversity to grow into the crew we all know and love.

That doesn't mean it wouldn't be improved by having a fleshed out villain...or that it was annoying that they HAD a fully fleshed out villain and chose to make the audience pay extra to find that out.

Quote

As for the "you could explain it all in 10 minutes of footage" argument, unless you have an intimate understanding of the editing process, I don't think you can really say that with any authority.

And you can't say it couldn't. The comic book presents Nero's back story in fairly short order. Since a comic book is basically a storyboard presentation, I highly doubt they would have had difficulty in translating that economically to the screen. But, as you said, I'm not an expert...and neither are you.

« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 03:30:15 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.